Tom Little KC successfully prosecuted Anjem Choudary and Khaled Hussein for terrorism offences. They were convicted by a jury following a six week trial at the Woolwich Crown Court before Wall J. Anjem Choudary was convicted of directing Al-Muhajiroun and of inviting support for Al-Muhajiroun. Khaled Hussein was convicted of being a member of Al-Muhajiroun. This complex trial involved cross jurisdictional evidence and the deployment of undercover officers from the United States of America and Canada. It is only the second successful prosecution ever in England for the offence of directing a terrorist organisation.
The judge in sentencing Anjem Choudary said “I must next consider whether you are a dangerous offender. I have no doubt that you are. I watched you give evidence for about a week. You are an intelligent man and a persuasive speaker to those who are open to the messages of hate which you spread. You are a man of great determination who has continued to pursue your aims despite your previous conviction for a terrorist offence and subsequent imprisonment. You have no doubt as to the rectitude of your views. Your views are entrenched and abhorrent to most right-thinking people. It was chilling to hear as part of the evidence at trial your denial of the holocaust, and your joking about the 9/11 attacks which remarks I am sure were designed to signify approval for what happened that day in New York. I do not sentence you for holding those views but the fact that you genuinely hold such extreme views coupled with your history of unlawful behaviour is an indication of the danger you pose into the future. I am sure that you will continue to preach your message of hate and division when or if you are given the opportunity to do so in the future. You are not someone who can be diverted from that course by any form of intervention. You pose a significant risk of causing serious harm to members of the public into the future by committing further specified offences such as this.”
The Supreme Court has ruled that claims for compensation by a man who killed three people, but was acquitted by a jury in the Crown Court on the grounds of insanity, are barred by the doctrine of illegality. The Claimant, Mr Lewis-Ranwell, sought damages from…
In this week’s Dekagram Dominique Smith examines a recent decision of the Court of Appeal considering and endorsing 90:10 split liability offers (contrary to the received wisdom following the decision of the High Court in Mundy v TUI [2023] EWHC 385 (Ch); and Robbie Parkin…
Kerry analyses Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust and the Supreme Court’s attempt to impose coherence on decades of caselaw from McLoughlin, Alcock and Frost through Walters, Shorter and Ronayne. She then asks the hard question for modern travel law practitioners: what, if anything, can claimants do…
Deka Chambers: 5 Norwich Street, London EC4A 1DR